Planning Commission meeting 5/22/2012

 Project Schedule  Planning Commission’s Role  Review Chapters 1 – 3 of Draft SMP  Focus is on understanding key concepts and regulations  Questions

 Listen  Understand  Ask questions  Make suggestions

 May: Chapter 1 – 3  June: Chapter 4  July: Chapter 5  August: Chapters 6 and 7  Important point: DOE review still underway

 SMA/SMP Purpose: (1) public access (2) water- dependent uses (3) environment  Shoreline jurisdiction: 200 ft. + wetlands  Ecology approval required  No net loss of ecological functions

 What are environment designations?  State standard system.

 Key points:  Maritime: allows for industrial and commercial uses.  Allows for water-dependent industry (shipping, boat building, aquaculture, etc.)  Residential - Bluff Conservancy: appropriately sited development along bluff.  Generally more precise than existing designation  Planning Commission discussion?

 Applies to all areas w/i shoreline jurisdiction  Focus on key concepts:  Public access  Vegetation conservation  Mitigation sequencing  Other sections:  Econ. dev., archaeology, critical areas, environmental impacts & mitigation, etc.

 Public access: context  Hot topic with Shoreline Advisory Committee  One of three main SMA goals  Definition includes physical and visual access  Based on Public Trust Doctrine (PTD)  Putting access in perspective: most of OH shoreline already developed

 Public access: When is physical access required?  When development creates demand/need  SFR and subdivisions of four lots or less excluded  Public land or applicant is public agency  Interference with existing access

 Public access: When is physical access not required?  Safety hazards  Security of the use  Disproportionate cost  Environmental harm  Land use conflict w/ access (industrial?)

 Public access: Other key provisions (physical)  Adjacency to Waterfront Trail (regs. 3 & 8, pg. 31 & 32)  Fee in lieu (reg. 6, pg. 32)  Width: 12 ft. (reg. 18, pg. 33)  Design: (reg. 19, pg. 33)

 Public access: Key provisions (visual)  Views from public areas can be protected (reg. 20, pg. 33)  View study (reg. 21, pg. 33)  Reqs. of view study (reg. 22, pg. 33)  View mitigations (reg. 23, pg. 34)  Central point: balance private property rights with public interest. Committee struggled here.  Misconception: Either the view or the building

 Vegetation Conservation: context  Science: human and environmental benefits  Guidelines: conservation required. Prove no net loss.  Requirements: Based on Ecology experience and science on buffer width.  Ecology: prefer buffer and setback system. Buffers – 30 feet in urban setting.

 Alternatives:  Option A: Two Tier/Two Zone  Option B: Min/Max Setback  Option C: Standard setback

 Vegetation Conservation: Key Provisions  Zone 1: VMZ (buffer) – feet wide (pg. 38 – 39)  Priority area for replacement and mitigation  Existing non-native vegetation can be maintained, not expanded  Pervious pathway 6 feet wide  Waterfront Trail improvements  80% native vegetation required

 Vegetation Conservation: Key Provisions  Zone 2: setback – ft (pg. 39)  New non-native allowed  Impervious limited to 20%  Water-oriented uses allowed (patios, decks, gazebos, boathouses, hot tubs)  Pervious pathway 6 feet wide  60% native vegetation required

 Vegetation Conservation: (pg )  Regulations triggered by new development exceeding 60% of assessed value  Shoreline landscape plan required  Requirement for plan may be waived if Zone 1 =80% native vegetation, Zone 2 = 60% native vegetation  Tree removal: significant trees – Zone 1 – 3:1, Zone 2 – 2:1, elsewhere 1:1

 Environmental Impacts and Mitigation (pg. 27)  Mitigation sequencing  Avoid – don’t impact if you don’t have to  Minimize – avoid where possible  Rectify – rehabilitate impacted area  Reduce or eliminate – preserve or maintain over time  Compensation –replace function somewhere else  Monitoring – measure and take corrective measures